Category: Decentralization

Why are many of the people on the left of such an authoritarian mentality? They are so authoritarian in their worship of the federal government and its illicit powers and feared losing the power so much they disrupted the Brett Kavanaugh hearings, and engaged in so much obvious cheating during the recent mid-term elections. (Not that Republicans weren’t engaged in cheating or at least questionable behavior as well, such as in Georgia.)

During the Kavanaugh hearings, Sen. Cruella Harris began interrupting Chairman Grassfed as soon as he began the hearings, and it went downhill from there, especially with “Dr.” Ford who “Must Be Believed At All Times!” and Kavanaugh screaming how much he loves beer and telling us what a moron he is by keeping calendars going back to 1982. (Who does that?)

Meanwhile, informed people with a brain actually objected to Kavanaugh based on his terrible rulings rubber-stamping tyranny, and his being a corrupt bureaucrat. But no, the fanatics on the left are concerned about abortion. That’s what they care about. And “Free Health Care for ALL!”and all that.

The fanatics believe that the Supreme Court is the God of government, that those 9 robed bureaucrats have the absolute final say on our freedom (and our enslavement). So it’s so important that they have to interrupt hearings, harass senators who voted for Kavanaugh, and cheat in elections. What a life.

But, as Tom Woods points out in a recent article, especially in his quoting of James Madison, the federal judicial branch is the final decision-maker on constitutional conflicts only between the branches of the federal government (judicial, legislative and executive), but NOT the final decision-maker on conflicts between the federal government and the states.

As Woods has explained in the past, the states, after all, created the federal government, not the other way around. The people of the states are the “boss” of the feds, and the agents of the federal government are the states’ “employees.” Unfortunately, that has been turned around by authoritarians (especially reinforced by Lincoln) who believe that whatever the federal government says, goes. “You will report to us your earnings, where you work or whom you employ, we will take a portion of your wealth whether you like it or not, we will spy on you and know the personal details of your private life and you will not know what we are up to, we’ll just mark everything ‘classified,’ and so on…”

So that stuff that the bureaucrats in Washington have been doing, that fools like Brett Kavanaugh have been rubber-stamping out of loyalty to the Regime and its racket, is unconstitutional, illicit, and criminal. This is why the writers of the Bill of Rights included the Tenth Amendment, which reads, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

Which is not very well written, by the way. It should have explicitly stated that the people of the states shall nullify any federal government rule, law or order on them whose enforcement they conclude would be in violation of their liberty, persons or property. Otherwise, the Founders needlessly created a federal government and ratified a questionableConstitution, going against the very principles of their Declaration of Independence.

Thomas Jefferson and others endorsed that idea of nullification which many people on the left now ignorantly perceive as having to do with racism or “slavery,” even though some states engaged in nullification during the Civil War period when they nullified Fugitive Slave Laws (which Lincoln strongly endorsed and enforced, by the way).

As Woods wrote in an essay in his Liberty Classroom, “nullification was used against slavery, as when northern states did everything in their power to obstruct the enforcement of the fugitive-slave laws, with the Supreme Court of Wisconsin going so far as to declare the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 unconstitutional and void. In Ableman v. Booth (1859), the U.S. Supreme Court scolded it for doing so. In other words, modern anti-nullification jurisprudence has its roots in the Supreme Court’s declarations in support of the Fugitive Slave Act. Who’s defending slavery here?”

But as I wrote in this article, we are now slaves of the federal government.

Concocting a centralized, ruling federal government was a mistake made by the Revolutionaries. Besides the social fascists and authoritarians on the left, now we have a Donald Trump who claims that his job is “running the country,” which, as Richard Ebeling pointed out in this very informative new article, is a “claim to abrogate the liberty of each and every member of that society to have the freedom to run their own life as they peacefully and honestly see fit in voluntary and mutually agreed-upon association with their fellow human beings for their respective betterment as they define it.”

One of the latest examples of the absurdity of this centralized power apparatus in Washington is that the bureaucrats are going to bring criminal charges against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, because he provided the means for whistleblowers to expose the criminality of the federal bureaucrats and their goons. Whistleblowers such as Bradley Manning with the Iraq War Logs, the Afghanistan War Logs, the diplomatic cables leaks, the “Collateral Murder” video, and all the rest.

As I wrote above, the criminals of the regime classify whatever they can to avoid embarrassing disclosures, evade transparency, get away with murder, and punish whistleblowers. Bradley Manning, by the way, was viciously persecuted by Obama’s regime, not Bush, with 3 years of solitary confinement pre-trial and a kangaroo trial and sentencing. (Although I think the main reason the SJW-in-Chief Barack Obama then commuted Manning’s 35-year sentence was because Manning is a “transgender.” Those are the things Obama et al. really care about.)

You see, as many people have noted now in the Obama DOJ and FBI’s surveillance abuses and how the Obama administration was so bad with civil liberties and freedom of speech and his war on the Press, we now have Cruella Harris and Pocahontas and all their moonbat followers drooling to take the apparatus of power back so THEY can once again use the spying powers against enemies and enforce their beloved police state on the people.

Matthew Silber writes about defusing a second civil war through peaceful secession. (In my view, the choices are voluntary, peaceful secession and decentralization, OR, let the society in Amerika collapse with chaos, violence and bloodshed. I prefer the former, not the latter.)

As a follow-up to my rant yesterday on the protesters who have been harassing government officials at restaurants, I am going to reiterate my support. And reiterate my condemnation of criminal thugs terrorizing Tucker Carlson’s family at his home, as well. Carlson is not a government official.

However, many of the protesters’ motivations are not in favor of dismantling the powers of the government that sics government enforcers onto innocent people, unfortunately. Many of the “protesters” and harassers are in favor of their own “liberal police state,” in which they want to sic the enforcers onto innocent people who disobey the left’s fascist mandates, intrusive regulations, and so forth. Liberals and progressives are as much police statists as the conservatives, warmongers and drug warriors.

But as I wrote yesterday, of course the citizens should bother, annoy, harass, make fun of, taunt, humiliate, and shame those government bureaucrats at public places, such as Ted Cruz and Mitch McConnell. Those apparatchiks have been supporting and voting for terrible, totalitarian anti-liberty legislation such as NDAA that empowers government agents to arrest and detain indefinitely citizens without charges or suspicion, voting for the various laws involving the drug war in which innocent people’s homes are criminally broken into by enforcers who terrorize and ransack the homes of innocent people who supposedly disobeyed government prohibitions of having a plant, or other Soviet-like diktats. These bureaucrats should be harassed, taunted, and shamed into deciding to repeal all that totalitarian crap!

And yesterday I wrote that most of these bureaucrats are “life-long parasites, and/or apologists for the State’s evil,” including Sarah Huckabee Sanders, that I described as the White House propagandist, which is what she is. If you look at Sanders’s Wikipedia bio, it states that at age 10 she was already working on one of her father Gomer’s political campaigns.

So Gomer already had his daughter Sarah indoctrinated to worship the false god of the State early on, in my view, which is the case with many people in America, in and out of government. In college Sanders majored in political science and mass communications (i.e. government propaganda). In all her bios online I can’t find any evidence that she ever worked in the private sector. Just political campaigns and government. Yech.

And yes, many of today’s American Christians worship their false god, the government in Washington, as well as government rulers in general and their enforcers. And I think that includes the Huckabees, Sarah and her father Mike, a.k.a. Gomer.

Many are True Believers in this nationalistic “American Exceptionalism” theology that excuses U.S. government criminality in the name of trying to prevent people from getting drugs, and in the name of “spreading democracy” (another false god), i.e. warmongering.

Laurence Vance, who in my view is certainly more of an expert on the Bible and Christianity than Mike Huckabee, has written many articles and blog posts on Christians’ false worship of government as a god.

Huckabee disparages redistribution of wealth, public assistance, abortion, Obamacare, out-of-wedlock births, public employee unions, government debt and deficits, tax increases, the estate tax, and government stimulus programs….On Social Security, Huckabee even calls for raising the retirement age, cutting benefits, delaying payments to the elderly by giving them tax incentives to keep working, and offering those who don’t need Social Security the option of a tax-free, lump-sum benefit payable at their death to their chosen beneficiary in lieu of collecting Social Security benefits. On Medicare, he calls for raising the age of eligibility. Yet, Huckabee falls short of labeling Social Security and Medicare what they really are – redistribution of wealth schemes that he condemns – and calling for their elimination. This is the problem with Huckabee and most Republicans and conservatives – they fall short, too short and too often. So, out of one side of his mouth Huckabee can disparage the things he does, but out of the other side he can support government-funded school breakfasts, “the right of every citizen to a free public education,” vouchers for Medicare recipients, elimination of the home mortgage interest deduction, the FairTax with its public-assistance, wealth-redistributing prebate, the Race to the Top federal program, a “reasonable deficit” of no more than 3 percent of GDP, and “hefty fines and prison time” for employers who choose to hire whom they wish.

…

With Huckabee being a Baptist preacher, one would think that he might call for missionaries to go to Iraq and Afghanistan and convert Muslims to Christianity instead of calling for U.S. soldiers to go and kill them: “We’ve had too many of our troops spending too much of their time painting schools and digging wells. They should be allowed to focus on killing Islamic extremists who want us all to die.”

In other words, today’s Christians and conservatives are like most True Believers in American Exceptionalism, blindly and obediently believing the government’s propaganda in the name of justifying wars of aggression and rationalizing murdering innocents overseas, and justifying the Amerikan police state. The collectivism of the 20th century continues to this day.

And also, why do the Exceptionalists never or rarely question the income tax? We never hear them criticize the government in its theft of private wealth and property, because most people are brainwashed to believe that their worshiped government authorities are entitled to the people’s earnings and wealth. And that includes conservatives and Christians who believe that crap.

And then there’s the drug war. While many Christians happily consume their own drug of choice, their beer and booze, they have no problem with siccing government police on peaceful people who happen to have some drug or plant that a bureaucrat doesn’t want them to have. On the drug war, Mike Huckabee is a True Believer in the Police State.

The burden of proof is on Christian drug warriors. Where did the Apostle Paul, in his travels throughout the Roman Empire, ever express support for any type of legislation or state action against vice, immorality, or sin? He certainly told Christians how they should live their life, and even provided lists of vices, immoral actions, and sins that Christians should avoid. Things like: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, covetousness, anger, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication, effeminacy, idolatry, hatred, strife, reveling, witchcraft, evil speaking, lying, and bitterness. But Paul never expressed a desire for the civil authorities to arrest, fine, or imprison anyone for engaging in these things. And neither do modern Christians. Just like they don’t call for the government to prosecute people for committing one of the seven deadly sins of pride, envy, wrath, sloth, avarice, gluttony, and lust. So what is so special, so egregious, about someone using drugs?

…

Christian(s) should only use persuasion. Persuasion, not coercion. Persuasion, not legislation. Persuasion, not legal action. Persuasion, not threats. Persuasion, not compulsion. Persuasion, not violence. Persuasion, not incarceration. The weapons of our warfare are not carnal” (2 Corinthians 10:4). There are, unfortunately, too many people in the United States—including too many Christians—who want to remake society in their own image and compel others to live only in ways that they approve of. Did you ever notice that there is no shortage of Americans—including no shortage of American Christians—willing to kill for the military, torture for the CIA, wiretap for the FBI, grope for the TSA, and destroy property for the DEA? It is not just libertarians who can appeal to the wisdom of Ludwig von Mises: “He who wants to reform his countrymen must take resource to persuasion. This alone is the democratic way of bringing about changes. If a man fails in his endeavors to convince other people of the soundness of his ideas, he should blame his own disabilities. He should not ask for a law, that is, for compulsion and coercion by the police.” That is the spirit of New Testament Christianity. And Mises was a nonreligious Jew, not a Christian.

The problem with many of these people is that they worship the government in Washington, the high-and-mighty rulers, and their enforcers and the military. False gods. But what bureaucrats and their enforcers have been doing to innocent, peaceful people have been evil criminal acts in the name of “enforcement” of bureaucratic edicts.

All this totalitarianism is exactly why the Founding Fathers created America, to protect the people from government violence!

So it is good that the people (aware of the risks of possible false arrest and false imprisonment, of course) harass, taunt, and shame Ted Baxter Ted Cruz and Mitch McConnell et al. into rethinking their positions and votes and make them decide to vote and pass legislation to repeal and dismantle the Nazi-like police state, including DHS, TSA, ICE, DEA, NDAA, and so on. Congressional bureaucrats also need to be pressured to pass legislation to close down those U.S. military bases in all parts of the world that are not U.S. territories. They don’t belong there! Those are occupations, the wars our government has been starting against other countries have been criminal wars of aggression. But the Amerikan warvangelicals believe otherwise, sadly.

However, obviously it is not realistic to get power-grabbers to willfully let go of their unjust and undeserved powers over the people. As Jim Davies wrote, regarding the unrealistic possibility of a libertarian President,

…the change has to come bottom-up, not top-down. It must not – it cannot – be imposed from above, it must be demanded from beneath. Government will vanish not when a President announces it will cease to exist at year’s end, or whenever, but when it is universally seen to be so destructive that nobody will work for it. When all its employees walk out, there will be no need for an election, nobody will be over-ruled and nobody will riot.

Reasons to leave government employ are offered in TinyURL.com/QuitGov – pass that simple URL around – but that short site will not suffice on its own, to provide the in-depth education needed. For that, TOLFA or an equivalent must be offered to everyone – not just those now in “government service” but to all who might replace them when they quit.

Perhaps the protesters can harass, bother, taunt and humiliate the government employees, the apparatchiks of the vicious criminal regime (such as Ted Cruz, Mitch McConnell and Sarah Huckabee Sanders) that they will decide to quit government “work” and instead go into the private sector, and others will follow.

However, I am not particularly in agreement with Murray’s views on immigration. As I wrote in the post on the New Jersey election, “Dr. Sabrin does say he’s for immigration reform. I am not sure I totally agree with the specifics. I would repeal all laws pertaining to immigration, because the Constitution does not authorize the federal government to get involved in immigration. Just leave people alone, as long as you don’t suspect someone of committing acts of aggression, theft or fraud. It doesn’t matter whether the individual is within the “borders” or on the outside and traveling in.”

And I also included in that post a quote from Tom Knapp, who happens to be on the national Libertarian Party’s platform committee. Here’s Tom Knapp:

When I sought appointment to the Libertarian Party’s 2018 platform committee, I made a few commitments (including):

To seek a committee recommendation that the Libertarian Party delete the final sentence of Plank 3.4, “Free Trade and Migration,” as follows: “We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. However, we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a credible threat to security, health or property.” Thanks to the committee for considering, and passing, this proposal!

I don’t think the LP platform says anything about “citizenship.” If it does, it shouldn’t.

“I oppose birthright citizenship because it is not consistent with the fundamental concept of citizenship–a strong cultural and political tie to a nation’s legal and economic systems. Citizenship requires embracing a nation’s founding ideals. For America, that means embracing our founding documents, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, especially all the rights guaranteed to a nation’s citizens. Coming to America legally is the best way to demonstrate that an immigrant will make our country his homeland to become a productive citizen.” – Murray Sabrin on the 14th Amendment

“I oppose birthright citizenship because it is not consistent with the fundamental concept of citizenship.”

But the “fundamental concept of citizenship” is not consistent with the fundamental concept of liberty, freedom of association, and private property, very important libertarian principles.

No, America has in its Constitution the First Amendment that protects the right of freedom of thought and conscience of every individual. In America, you can have the freedom to think and believe whatever the hell you want, even crackpot communist kookery.

If someone doesn’t “embrace the founding documents,” then he is not allowed “citizenship”? Not allowed in? Should we kick out Bernie Sanders, Evita Ocasio-Cortez, and Donald Trump? (And most of Trump’s cabinet, most of the U.S. Congress and the Supreme Court, and on and on…)

One commenter on Murray’s Facebook post stated that “The entire concept of citizenship is statist and un-libertarian.” And I totally agree with that.

I think a lot of people out there are America worshipers, and see this country as more of a private club than a territory in which the freedom of the individual is protected. Including the freedom of thought and conscience. The nationalists and conservatives and talk radio ditto-heads are obsessed with “citizenship” as well as their collectivism and America group identity mysticism. Many people of this variety do not see the forest for the trees, when it comes to the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, and especially private property and free-market capitalism. They want socialism in immigration controls in their endorsing of Washington’s central-planning bureaucrats’ attempted but futile controls over the movements of millions of people. And I must say, what a shame that there are very prominent libertarians who have been eating up the “immigrant invasion” fear-mongering. I’m reminded of the killer bees coming up from the south … and it never happened.

But if you are in New Jersey, please vote for Murray Sabrin. Make a statement to the Republicrats and Demopublicans in Washington.

Elizabeth Warren is the U.S. senator from Massachusetts running for a second term that she supposedly will easily win on Tuesday. But she is campaigning in other states, most recently Ohio and Wisconsin (two very big electoral college states for a Presidential election), supposedly for candidates in close races in those states. I am sure that this trend of Warren staying outside of Massachusetts will continue and escalate after she is reelected to the U.S. Senate, given her statement that she would “take a hard look” at running for President in 2020.

You see, power hungry politicians love power so much that they are constantly seeking higher offices and more power.

Warren, a.k.a. Pocahontas, isn’t the only political hack from Massachusetts to begin a run for President while supposedly “serving” her constituents in a current office. During the 1980s, Gov. Michael Dukakis was reelected in 1986 to a third term, and already “testing the waters” for a 1988 Presidential bid.

In 1987 and ’88 Dukakis was absent from Massachusetts so many times, he should have resigned as governor and let Lt. Gov. Evelyn Murphy take over officially as the acting governor. But noooo, Dukakis was not able to let go of his current power in his drive for even more power. Just as Elizabeth Warren is doing now.

And then when Evelyn Murphy ran for governor of Massachusetts in 1990, Dukakis wouldn’t help her and didn’t campaign for her, as Barack Obama and Donald Trump are doing now on behalf of their respective party candidates in elections this Tuesday. So, Dukakis (who turns 85 today, by the way — must be all those turkey carcasses), was kind of walking all over his Lt. Gov. Evelyn Murphy while he ran for President, in which she performed all the duties as governor in his absence, but he wouldn’t resign and make it “official,” or help her in her 1990 election bid, which she lost even in the primary.

And then we had Gov. Mitt Romney, a.k.a. “Willard” Romney, who walked all over his Lt. Governor Kerry Healey, a.k.a. “Muffy Healey,” while Romney was absent from the state for over 200 days in 2006, his last year as governor while Healey performed all the duties of governor. And then Romney wouldn’t help her in her election bid for governor in 2006, just like Dukakis in 1990 (because Romney was so power hungry, like Dukakis and Pocahontas in their lust for higher political office). Healey lost, of course.

In 2006, when Willard Romney was already running for President and abandoning his duties as governor, he shoved the mandatory health insurance law down the throats of the people of Massachusetts. So, right there he’s telling people not only is he not a free-market kind of guy, but he’s ramming mandatory health insurance regardless of how destructive it would turn out to be, just so he can campaign with some new government scheme to brag about from his time as governor.

Brag? About “RomneyCare”? By 2012 RomneyCare didn’t control costs, but he did cause the state’s largest provider for the poor to have to make cuts because of the impact of RomneyCare.

I think politicians with power love to order the masses to do this or that, whether you like it or not. “You must — MUST — have health insurance,” Romney commanded. Just like Michael Dukakis ordering the people of Massachusetts you vill wear a seat belt, and you vill enjoy it.

And Elizabeth Warren, who wants to order private businesses to organize themselves via sex, national origin or race on their boards and their management teams, whether they like it or not, consumers be damned. Since when does Elizabeth Warren, creator of the Democrats’ money-laundering racket “Consumer Financial Protection Bureau,” care about consumers? What Pocahontas cares about is power, and more power for bureaucrats. In her bizarre world of irrationality, businesspeople must be accountable to bureaucrats, not to the consumers as it would work in an honest world.

Anyway, back to Romney. Here is Willard at the signing ceremony for his mandatory health care atrocity, introducing his unindicted co-conspirator Ted Kennedy:

During his time as governor of Massachusetts, Romney raised taxes on corporations. The tax hikes, according to columnist Deroy Murdock, “totaled $128 million in 2003, $95.5 in 2004, and $85 million in 2005.” And, according to Murdock, Romney “created or increased fees by $432 million…Romney charged more for marriage licenses (from $6 to $12), gun registrations (from $25 to $75), a used-car sales tax ($10 million), gasoline deliveries ($60 million), real-estate transfers ($175 million), and more. Particularly obnoxious was Romney’s $10 fee per Certificate of Blindness.”

My, what a great guy, this Willard.

You see, he is typical of the elitist political class, taking from the poor and middle class and redistributing the wealth to the rich fat-cats, as we saw in his support of the Wall Street Bailout in 2008. To show how clueless he was about the Federal Reserve and the financial crisis of 2007-2009, Romney endorsed the reappointment of Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke in 2010. During his 2012 campaign, Romney received the most among the GOP candidates (and more than Obama as well) from the Big Banks in campaign contributions between just January and September of 2011, according to Michael Snyder: $352,200 from Goldman Sachs, $184,800 from Morgan Stanley, and $112,500 from Bank of America.

As a crony capitalist with Bain Capital, Romney used government subsidies with some of the companies Bain bought out to restructure and sell and profit from.

Speaking of crony capitalism, when it comes to “climate change” interventionism, Romney is all in. No free market solutions in sight with this Willard. For instance, in 2012 he cited a study in support of carbon taxes, and, according to Forbes (or you can view that article here), Romney’s advisors were all for cap-and-trade legislation/regulations, subsidizing renewable energy, with one advisor who was involved in the “Department of Energy loan guarantee program that funded Solyndra,” and another who was responsible for getting the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments passed.

If you live in Utah and would rather not vote for Romney for U.S. Senate, then you might want to consider the Libertarian Party candidate, Craig Bowden.

So this Willard Romney person is the one who calledDonald Trump a “phony,” a “fraud,” a “fake,” and a “con man”! (Watch Willard begin his next run for President immediately after getting elected to the U.S. Senate, just like Elizabeth Warren. They are drooling for POWER!)

But when it comes to Elizabeth Warren and honesty and integrity in politics, I think that Liawatha comes very close to Willard in being a “phony,” a “fraud,” a “fake,” and a “con man” (or con-woman) in her claiming to be a minority to get her position on the Harvard Law School faculty. Because Warren knows nothing about law, and virtually anything else that matters, she had to take the sleazy way to “success.”

Incidentally, not that you would want to be reminded, but here is what Elizabeth Warren thinks of entrepreneurs, the producers of wealth that she as a bureaucrat wants to take away by force:

She’s trying to take down those who actually create the wealth in society by claiming that she and others share in the accomplishments based on “paying” for roads, schools, and police.

For one thing, a factory owner already does pay a lot for use of the government roads and labor services of his employees. In contrast to other “public goods,” roads often have a much more dedicated payment stream, in the form of tolls and gasoline taxes. So the factory owner, who pays trucking companies to ship products around, is already paying a lot more to maintain the interstate highway system than is a lower-income person living in Manhattan with no car.

Politicians don’t really think things through, do they?

So, in that video Warren roars, “You were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory…”

You mean, like power-grabbing socialists, Elizabeth? Like the Venezuelan regime? Like Cuba? The Soviet Union? Like you greedy bureaucrats in Washington? The ones for whom nothing is ever enough, no amount of taxation is enough for you crooks!

As with most politicians, has Elizabeth Warren ever produced anything of value in her nearly 70 years? Should we compare her or any politician or bureaucrat to Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Andrew Carnegie, or Martha Stewart, or Oprah?

Nope. That bunch of entrepreneurs created wealth with their talents and many, many people have benefited from their accomplishments. They were or are creators. Wealth creators.

But the power grabbers and power seekers of politics and government continue their push for more and more power over others. They are not the wealth creators of society, it’s just the opposite. They are the takers, the confiscators, the thieves, the obstructionists, the true “oppressors” of our time.

James Bovard writes that we need a #MeToo movement for political consent, comparing to non-consensual sex the fact that even though you vote for your elected officials chances are that you don’t really consent to their votes or policies that result in violating your rights and your life, liberty or property. Yet, that is mostly what public officials and their enforcers do.

But that is the system that we have in place. The masses elect people to “represent” them and to “serve” their needs, but because the system is a compulsory monopoly and the masses must obey the authorities’ laws, policies, mandates or prohibitions, those in power can really do whatever they want and get away with it, no matter how dishonest, corrupt or criminal.

And it is worse the more centralized the system is. That is why if this society is going to survive as a civilized society, it must get rid of the centralized apparatus in Washington. It shouldn’t have been created to begin with. The more decentralized the better.

A lot of people just can’t or won’t grasp that. The conservatives who say they love “limited government” don’t want to admit the truth, because they are so mystical in their “love of America” and just a little too indoctrinated to love the government in Washington whose bureaucrats have more or less ruined America. The talk radio crowd are authoritarians who love and worship government police and government military and thus they love the Washington apparatus. The thought of dismantling the empire overseas, closing down all those U.S. military bases and bringing all the troops back to the U.S. (and putting them in the private sector!) frightens the conservatives and nationalists who “love America.” They believe in American Exceptionalism, not the Golden Rule.

And the people on the left want “democratic socialism,” or socialism, or communism, whichever word you like. They mean the same thing, quite frankly. They want to “destroy capitalism,” even though they have cars, iPhones, TVs, and all the crappy junk food they can eat as a result of capitalism, not socialism. What’s going on in Venezuela is what they will get if they really want socialism in America, the empty store shelves, the long lines, the mass starvation, the government killings of dissidents, military takeovers of industries, and their beloved Maduro and his minions living high off the hog at the people’s expense. That is what happens when the government takes over industry and has the power to steal wealth and earnings from the people. The rulers live off their slaves’ labor, which is pretty much what we have now in Amerika.

And as we have seen from the anti-foreigner, anti-immigrant morons like Trump and his ditto-head followers is that they actually love socialism, too, and not capitalism. Capitalism being “free markets,” that is, which necessarily includes a free market in labor and employment. If the anti-immigrant crowd wants to deport foreigners or block people from coming to America, arrest businessmen for hiring unauthorized workers regardless of their being peaceful and not harming anyone, then those anti-immigrant collectivists are really against free markets, and for government-controlled or government-owned markets, i.e. socialism.

So now we have elections next week. And for what? So Democrats can be empowered to impeach Trump or have special investigations of him, and attempt to repeal the Trump tax cuts that have enabled people to keep more of what rightfully belongs to them? Like the conservatives, the people on the left don’t seem to like freedom very much, as their policies have been mainly to confiscate the wealth or earnings of others, based on envy and covetousness. But then, the anti-immigrant crowd are also acting on covetousness when they approve of government police-state interfering in the honest, peaceful labor of foreigners. “They’re taking jobs away from Americans,” and all that crap. American “citizens” are entitled to a job by an employer in America. So, it isn’t just the people on the left who have a covetous entitlement mentality.

And let’s elect more Republicans to Congress to further expand the police state, further empower the military as they’re doing now, further expand the surveillance state, and all the bureaucracies that Republicans love as much as the Democrats. The Rethugs are True Believers, that’s for sure. (Read Laurence Vance’s articles exposing the Republicans.)

So I’m not sure if we can have a #MeToo movement for political consent as long as the system of institutionalized non-consent is in place. Let’s have a free society instead. Okay.

Jacob Hornberger of the Future of Freedom Foundation has this excellent article pointing out supposedly libertarian conservatives’ cognitive dissonance in their claiming to be libertarians, claiming to believe in private property rights and the non-aggression principle, yet supporting the government immigration controls including the police state along the border (and the police state within the country as well).

Hornberger writes:

Whenever you see an article or a speech advocating immigration controls by a conservative libertarian, you will notice one glaring feature, without exception: the absence of any mention of the death, suffering, and the police state that inevitably accompany a system of immigration controls. There is a good reason for that silence: the conservative libertarians do not want libertarians to know that the system they are advocating for the libertarian movement comes with death, suffering, and a police state.

Hornberger says he is a “limited-government libertarian” (as opposed to a zero-government libertarian or a voluntaryist. I am a voluntaryist).

There actually are prominent libertarians who have been with the libertarian movement for decades and who claim to be “anarcho-capitalists,” but because of their belief in “preserving our culture,” or preserving our American culture, whatever that is now, these so-called anarcho-capitalist and conservative libertarians seem to tacitly support the current immigration police state, government central planning in immigration, and the central planners in Washington and their attempts to control the movements of millions of people, something which central planners can never do. However, those prominent anarcho-capitalists do not openly state their defense of such government controls, but such support is nevertheless implied in their articles and speeches, in my view.

Hornberger lists the several problems with government immigration controls that conservative libertarians seem to be supporting:

1. Fixed highway checkpoints. These are located on domestic highways. Federal agents stop domestic travelers who have never crossed into Mexico. They ask them questions. If people refuse to answer their questions, the agents will break their car window, drag them out of their car, and beat them up…

2. Warrantless trespasses onto farms and ranches within 100 miles of any U.S. border. No search warrants. No probable cause. No reasonable suspicion…

3. Roving Border Patrol checkpoints…

4. Violent government raids on private businesses, ones in which the business owner has decided to use his own money to enter into mutually beneficial labor relations with citizens of foreign countries. That’s what a police state is all about.

5. Forcible governmental separation of children from their parents…

6. Forcible deportations of people who are engaged in purely peaceful acts, such as exercising the fundamental God-given rights of pursuing happiness and entering into mutually beneficial economic relations with others. That’s what a police state is all about.

7. The construction of a Berlin Fence and the proposed construction of a Berlin wall along the U.S.-Mexico border…

8. Border Patrol agents boarding Greyhound buses in cities and towns within 100 miles of any U.S. border, which they are now doing all over the United States. They are targeting Hispanics and anyone else who doesn’t look like a genuine American and demanding to see their papers…

9. Complete searches of body and vehicle at international crossing points, including body cavities after the person is required to completely disrobe in front of federal agents…

In my view, the real answers to the immigration problems in Amerika are ending the drug war, dismantling the welfare state or at least not letting immigrants get government welfare, and, most of all, full decentralization of this entire territory, which, as I have repeatedly stated, is just too damn big a territory to be one single country!

In 1991, 15 states seceded from the Soviet Union. This was the greatest peaceful revolution in modern history. American political elites did not see it coming even though Soviet officials told them what was about to happen. Their minds were so controlled by the notion that a modern state is “one and indivisible” they could not imagine peaceful secession. That Soviet secession occurred peacefully had a ripple effect, and soon after a number of peaceful secessions occurred in Europe and more secession movements have arisen. The result is that secession is now thought of in Europe as a neutral act to be evaluated on its merits rather than as something necessarily bad as Lincoln classified it when he identified it with anarchy and a threat to government as such. Today even Americans are beginning to think of secession in a neutral way, despite Lincoln and the Pledge of Allegiance.

As I have been saying, the territory of this “America” country is just TOO BIG. It’s too big in population and in area from coast to coast and border to border. It’s too big to be all one single country and a single “culture,” whatever that means anymore. I know, the mystical nationalists might intellectually be able to recognize those problems with “America,” but emotionally? Nope. They can’t let go of what they’ve been indoctrinated with their entire lives, starting with their 7 or 8 hours per day sitting in a classroom, standing for the “Pledge,” and their intellectual curiosity and their questioning the authoritarianism of the day being stifled by their authoritarian teachers.

But there are those who aren’t too brainwashed in the cult of America worship, and perhaps those people can be reached with a dose of reality. I hope.